Allowed

Daisy Abraham v. a.K.v.Shanmugham

Kerala HC24 May 2011MACA/1626/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed an appeal challenging the compensation quantum in a motor accident death claim. The Court enhanced dependency compensation from Rs. 4,08,000 to Rs. 6,12,000 based on evidence of the deceased's spice business income, modifying the Tribunal's award accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,04,000 awarded along with interest at 7.5% per annum; Tribunal award modified to this extent.

Daisy Abraham Vs a.K.v.Shanmugham — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI

¶3

TUESDAY, THE 24TH MAY 2011 / 3RD JYAISHTA 1933 MACA.No. 1626 of 2004() ----------------------OP.MV.1212/1998 of M.A.C.T., THALASSERY ....................

¶4

APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:

¶5

¶6

DAISY ABRAHAM, AGED 36 YEARS, W/O. LATE ABRAHAM PHILIP, THATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ERUVESSY, AMSOM, P.O. KUDIYANMALA.

¶7

BIBILLA, AGED 13 YEARS, D/O. LATE ABRAHAM PHILIP, MINOR THROUGH GUARDIAN 1ST APPELLANT.

¶8

BABITHA, AGED 12 YEARS, D/O. LATE ABRAHAM PHILIP, MINOR THROUGH GUARDIAN 1ST APPELLANT.

¶9

ABIN BABY, AGED 9 YEARS, S/O. LATE ABRAHAM PHILIP, MINOR THROUGH GUARDIAN 1ST APPELLANT.

¶10

ANNAMMA, W/O. PHILIP, AGED 58 YEARS, THATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ERUVESSY AMSOM, P.O. KUDIYANMALA.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD

¶12

RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS:

¶13

¶14

A.K.V. SHANMUGHAM, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, MAYAJOTHI MOTORS, KANHANGAD P.O., KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶15

MANIKUTTAN, S/O. PEETHAMBARAN, KALLIDUKKIL HOUSE, NILESHWAR, P.O. KALLICHANDUKKAM, KASARGOD DISTRICT.

¶16

M/S. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., CITY BRANCH, SOUTH BAZAR, KANNUR.

¶17

ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R3 SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R3

¶18

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.

¶20

¶21

M.A.C.A.No.1626 OF 2004

¶22

- - - - Dated this the 24^th day of May, 2011

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Barkath Ali, J.

¶25

Appellants are claimants 1 to 4 and 6 in OP(MV)No.1212/1998

¶26

on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thalassery. They are the wife, children and mother of deceased Abraham Philip who died in a motor accident. In this appeal they challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated May 7, 2004 awarding a compensation of Rs. 4,53,000/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased in that accident.

¶27

On October 16, 1997, while the deceased was travelling in

¶28

a jeep bearing Reg.No.KL-13/D 799, the jeep dashed against a bus bearing Reg.No.KL 13/B 5337 driven by the second respondent. The deceased sustained serious injuries and he succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment in the hospital on the same day. Alleging negligence against the second respondent, the claimants filed the OP under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a

¶29

MACA.No.1626/2004

¶30

¶31

compensation of Rs.12,00,000/-.

¶32

Respondents 1 and 2, the owner and the driver of the offending bus though entered appearance did not file any written statement. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending bus filed a written statement admitting the policy.

¶33

PW 1 was examined and Exts.A1 to A7 were marked on

¶34

the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the contesting respondents. On an appreciation of evidence the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the second respondent and awarded a total compensation of Rs.4,53,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till 31/12/2001 and @ 6% per annum till realisation. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

¶35

Heard the counsel for the appellants/claimants and the counsel for the Insurance Company.

¶36

The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal

¶37

that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the

¶38

MACA.No.1626/2004

¶39

¶40

driver of the bus is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation.

¶41

The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of

¶42

Rs.4,53,000/- The break up of the compensation amount awarded is as under:

¶43

Loss of dependency	- Rs.4,08,000/-
Pain and suffering	- Rs. 5,000/-
Loss of love and affection	- Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of consortium	- Rs. 15,000/-
Funeral expenses	- Rs. 10,000/-

¶44

Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of

¶45

compensation for loss of dependency and on other heads.

¶46

The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- which works out to Rs. 36,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs. 24,000/- was taken as his annual contribution to his family. The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 17 and awarded Rs. 4,08,000/- for the loss of dependency. According to the claimants, the deceased was conducting spice business by name “Baby Spices” earning Rs.7,000/- per month. Ext.A3

¶47

MACA.No.1626/2004

¶48

¶49

is his sales tax registration certificate. Ext.A4 is the income tax notice received by him and Ext.A5 series are his income tax returns submitted by him for the assessment year 1996-97 and 1997-98. Ext.A7 is the extract of the entries in the sales tax assessment register relating to the deceased. Taking into consideration the above aspect, we feel that the monthly income of the deceased can be reasonably fixed at Rs.4,500/-. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs.3,000/- per month can be taken as his contribution to his family which comes to Rs.36,000/- per annum. The multiplier of 17 adopted by the Tribunal appears reasonable as the deceased was aged 30 at the time of the accident. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.6,12,000/- ( 36,000 x 17). Thus on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.2,04,000/-. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same.

¶50

In the result, the claimants are found entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 2,04,000/-. They are entitled to interest

¶51

MACA.No.1626/2004 5

¶52

@ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the enhanced compensation. They are also entitled to proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent.

¶53

The Appeal is disposed of as found above.

¶54

A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE

¶55

P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE

¶56

sv.

¶57

MACA.No.1626/2004 6

Daisy Abraham v. a.K.v.Shanmugham

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Daisy Abraham v. a.K.v.Shanmugham

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jessy Prakash Vs Gayathri Devi Jalan

National Insurance Co.Ltd Vs Laila Beegam & Another

8AJENDRAN Nair Vs Vikraman

C.P.Alocious Vs Pradeepkumar

M.S.Pemmaiah Vs T.K.Mani

C.a.Suresh Vs T.C.Somasundaram